Entertainment desk
< October 2	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 4 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 3

Who owns the music rights to Kalluri Vaanil

Does anyone know who owns the music or syncing rights to the song Kalluri Vaanil from the film Pennin Manathai Thottu? The song was further popularized in the states after it was phonetically dubbed on YouTube as "Benny Lava"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.67.35 (talk) 01:37, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TV news interview subjects who are first shown walking

I vaguely remember this topic being mentioned in passing some years ago, but we've never had a proper Q&A on it, as far as I can tell from my search.

On the TV news, some person is about to appear on camera to answer a journo's questions, as part of a story. In the few seconds it takes for the announcer to say who this person is and why they're relevant to the story, they're often shown walking:

sometimes they're walking along some unidentified footpath or through some unidentified park
sometimes they're walking into or out of the building where their office is
sometimes they're walking up to the receptionist in the foyer of their office, holding a sheaf of papers, and they discuss the papers with the receptionist or maybe just chat with them (or chat them up, for all I know)
sometimes they're seen walking into their personal office, and they sit down at their oddly pristine desk and open the papers they carried in with them and pretend to be intensely absorbed in them.

Clearly, it's all staged; they're not filmed candidly while they just happen to be walking somewhere. And nobody's desk is ever that clean. I vowed years ago that if I were ever interviewed on TV, I would refuse point blank to engage in such unmitigated rubbish. But many people seem to acquiesce.

My question: What is the point of this practice? Why couldn't they be shown standing next to the journo while he/she says something like "I have with me Mr/Ms XXX from ZZZ organisation", and then asks their first question? Sometimes that's exactly what happens, but mostly not. What's with the walking? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 03:47, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds to me like a type of Establishing shot, but genre specific. Also see B-roll. Sometimes, these conventions are arbitrary but still ingrained. Its the sort of thing which is pointless, but still expected, so it gets carried through uncritically. --Jayron32 03:54, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which leads me to wonder why such a practice ever started in the first place. If we accept there was once a point, which has become lost over time, what was that point? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 04:02, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Read the B-roll article. The idea is that you need "filler" to occupy the times when you have audio you need heard, but you don't have good corresponding video. I suppose you could show the interviewee staring blankly at the camera while the host introduces them, but a montage of "acting normal" probably conveys a more friendly and casual sort of feeling than the uncomfortable fidgeting of the interviewee waiting while the introductory text about them and their story is read by the narrator/interviewer. --Jayron32 04:07, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Showing them walking is just a uncreative way to "show them in action". If they were about to interview a hot dog vendor, they might show him putting toppings on a hot dog first. If they were about to introduce a garbage man, they might show him dumping a garbage bin into his truck. Compare this practice to introducing a person to a live audience. Somebody usually introduces them, then has them walk up to the podium from off-stage. This avoids them having to stand there and clap while being introduced, which is awkward. StuRat (talk) 18:17, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Attention is drawn by change and movement. The Dockers commercial campaigns of the 90's drew on this so heavily that they became the subject of satire. [[1] [2] μηδείς (talk) 04:19, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For a skewering of the entire contemporary news genre, see Charlie Brooker's Newswipe [3]. Henry ^Flower 15:17, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research: I have been interviewed and have been made to do these establishing shots (nothing noteworthy, mind you. Just a human interest story: I was the only one in the group willing to be miked up. I'm not camera shy.) Jayron32 explains what it is: filler. The interviewer told me as much: they needed shots to fill space while she talked and I didn't so as to set up the story. Better than random Stock footage. Mingmingla (talk) 17:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Made to"? What would their reaction have been if you'd said you declined to do it? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:04, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They'd just not have done the story, or find someone more cooperative. That's why I was picked: they told us what was expected, and I was the one willing to do the bit. There was nothing random about it. These establishing shots are usually done with sympathetic interviewees. You rarely see such shots of criminals or people who are subject to negative press. It's usually victims, advocates, professionals or human interest story-type people, and these are generally people who are willing to cooperate with these shots. Note also that they don't do this with "Vox pops" where they just grab a soundbite from the man on the street. Mingmingla (talk) 22:53, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right. So that relates to "But many people seem to acquiesce".

Thanks for all the other responses above, folks. I get the idea now.

I still think it looks dumb to show a person walking somewhere that has no relation to the story, but I guess whether something looks dumb has never been of any concern to journos. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:10, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Stadium info requested

Dear Wikipedia,

Eric Liddell the famous athlete of the 1924 Olympics (made famous in Chariots of Fire) was thought to have raced at Stamford Brook Amateur Athletis Track,(no longer in existence) I can find no reference to the stadium, Can you help??

Thanks

Edward Pawley [redacted email addr.] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.155.30 (talk) 11:48, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed your email info (so the bad guys can't get it) and added a heading. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:03, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I presume the same place that is now Stamford Bridge (stadium) MilborneOne (talk) 12:11, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here (about half way down) is a quote from Liddell about running at Stamford Bridge. I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that the track was ever known as Stamford Brook, but it's possible there was an athletics club with that name. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 17:48, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Pop Culture around the world

Never having traveled outside the U.S., I am curious as to how well American films and music are received in foreign markets, especially those in which English is not spoken. Movie box office receipts always show North American vs. International income. Wikipedia articles about songs list their peak position in dozens of countries. Are American songs and music as popular in other countries as those created by native citizens? Are American television programs similarly popular as well? Hemoroid Agastordoff (talk) 18:46, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a complex issue. Consider film. Hollywood has huge resources, so can put out a large quantity of films with high production values. This means the sound and video match, you don't see the microphone boom constantly dropping into frame, they have decent special effects and CGI, etc. However, this does not mean the quality of the story and acting is necessarily good, although, due to the quantity of films released by Hollywood, even if the average quality is low, there are still many excellent films released each year. The problem is that those films most likely to be exported are the crap ones with high production value but not much of a plot, and inferior acting. So, the impression abroad is that everything which comes out of Hollywood is total crap.

Then there's those who object to American values being exported to their nation. In some cases this objection seems reasonable, as American films often glorify "taking the law into your own hands", fornication, etc., which violate those nation's base values. Then there are cases where the American values being exported, IMHO, are better than those of the nation to which they are imported, like when they champion the equality of women. This type of thing is especially unwanted in many Muslim nations, where women are expected to behave differently than men.

In other forms of popular culture, similar issues arise. StuRat (talk) 19:18, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

StuRat, this is a great example of a question that can actually be answered quantitatively and where POV-ridden stream of consciousness only serves to confuse and enflame. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 21:39, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then, by all means, do so. StuRat (talk) 23:11, 3 October 2012 (UTC) [reply]

My pleasure! There are many ways to define popularity, but to give the example of movie tickets, Box Office Mojo provides yearly gross receipts for films. In the specific case of Finland, seven of the top ten for 2012 can be said to be American, one is internationally produced but powered by Finnish creativity, and the other two are straightforward domestic films. Taking the gross receipts of the seven American films vs. the three others, 72% of the receipts from those top ten went to American films. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 20:06, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

American movies and music and TV shows are very popular in French, and they are always dubbed, never (or almost never) subtitled. France does have a huge film and music industry of its own, but there didn't seem to be much in the way of native fictional sitcoms or dramas on TV... Adam Bishop (talk) 21:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See the receptions section of Dark Crystal, μηδείς (talk) 21:53, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see such a section. StuRat (talk) 23:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I went to List of highest-grossing films and found the top one to be Avatar (2009 film). In the Avatar (2009 film)#Box office section it says; "Avatar grossed $760,507,625 in the U.S. and Canada, and $2,021,767,547 in other territories for a worldwide total of $2,782,275,172 with 72.7% of its total worldwide gross in international markets" So nearly three quarters of the gross income came from outside North America. Alansplodge (talk) 00:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This pattern can be readily confirmed, particularly for blockbusters. The top movie of the last 10 years has averaged 61% of its gross from the international market, with only The Dark Knight (film) being below 50%.

American music is popular elsewhere in the world. A visit to any large 'record' store will show the variety of American, British and 'local' music that is available in many places. This site shows top 40 charts from many countries, and picking out a single example: This Is Love (will.i.am song) has appeared in a total of 23 charts.

American movies and TV are also popular. Those with a large marketing budget (ie. blockbusters) do very well, often outselling their domestic sales, even if the artistic quality is poor. Those with a restricted marketing budget might not even get shown at all. Quite how they are presented varies with location. In my experience in Europe, it is usually dubbed, except in Scandanavia and the Netherlands where non-children's movies are in English and with subtitles in the local language. In Paris (and other major cities around Europe) some cinemas will offer a choice of subtitled or dubbed. And of course, there is the local product that also gets a good audience, yet might never make it to the USA. That is unless some major studio decides to do a remake (which then often turns out to be an inferior version) - see List of English-language films with previous foreign-language film versions for a list. Astronaut (talk) 17:46, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One way of gauging how popular American music is in other countries is to take a look at some of the articles in Category:Lists of best-selling albums, and other related categories. There is a lot of regional variation, but in general Michael Jackson is popular all over the world; Thriller is the all-time best-selling album in several countries. It seems Japan loves Mariah Carey, as according to List of best-selling albums in Japan, three of the four highest-selling albums by non-Japanese artists are hers. Germany was surprising, I wouldn't have guessed the highest placing American artist in List of best-selling albums in Germany if I was given 100 guesses. Some genres travel better than others. Country and western doesn't sell well outside the US; Garth Brooks is the third-highest selling artist of all-time in the US, but barely registers outside North America. Occasionally there are American artists whose popularity abroad far exceeds that in their home country. One example is Fun Lovin' Criminals. They have had a string of hits in Europe, but only one charting single at home. This is perhaps because they appeal to a European image of what a band from New York ought to be like, but their self-styled gangster image comes across as phoney to their fellow Americans. Oldelpaso (talk) 19:14, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Walker Brothers did much better in the UK than in the US. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like Jimi Hendrix, they were an example of US musicians who made their first successful recordings, and had their first chart hits, after coming to the UK. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:13, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@ Sturat above, under box office, "During its international release in 1983, The Dark Crystal was the highest-grossing box office release for the year in both France and Japan.[citation needed] and out-grossed E.T. as the most successful foreign film in Japan until Titanic took over the spot 14 years later. The film has gained a cult following over the years since its release."

I see, so the "Box office" section, not a "Receptions" section. StuRat (talk) 21:43, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]